|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5547710 - 04/23/06 02:56 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Simply said, for example: If someone intrudes your private comfort zone or preferable relationship with reality, in a negative way, the obvious thing to do is putting a "should not" against him. At least, that is the way I see this. In large, for example, if someone kills big parts of nature for selfish reasons, because he has the material power to do so, for his right and good, isn't there a "should not" from the rest of us, because it also influences our own state of well-being in the 'wrong' way, manifesting as bad ?
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
*sigh* "Should" is about rule or obligation, whereas "preference" involves free choice. I prefer to be mentally healthy, therefore I avoid that which is psychologically toxic
you haven't gotten rid of shoulds at all, nor said anything profound. rule or obligation is based in preference. i have an obligation to let my father know i am taking classes this summer because he will be paying for it. not letting him know would lead to a situation that is less preferable. this is where should comes from. you cannot do away with should without also doing away with preference. calling the same thing by a different word doesn't change much.
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548059 - 04/23/06 04:30 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
There is more to it than "calling it by a different word."
"Should" or "must" or "have to" are worlds apart from "I choose to because I prefer the outcome of this action."
The flip side of a "should" is usually a negative judgment: if you don't do as you should, you are wrong/bad.
The flip side of a preference is just a non-preferred, but morally neutral, outcome.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548068 - 04/23/06 04:33 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Deviate said: calling the same thing by a different word doesn't change much.
It doesn't change much, but only to those who do not recognize the difference implied by different words. It isn't much change when one doesn't properly understand what is being changed. 
Preference, as a word, only represents the act of selecting something over other choices, or that which is selected. It does not provide any commentary on the nature of the choice or how the decision is made.
"Should" and "should not" are, essentially, commands. It is a dictation of suggestions within the context of obligations. Cause and effect, ultimately.
One can prefer in regards to one's current position in one's life situation and one's chosen path (which, in itself, is a preference) without utilizing a mechanism of dictation.
Utilizing only preferences implies consideration of one's thought processes involved in making the decision in a conscious, rational manner. Thinking through "shoulds" and "should nots" involves preconceived notions of what one's life situation is, first and foremost.
Maintaining a conscious presence in one's decision making means that one simply utilizes preferences, as a preference defines a choice simply as a choice. The reasoning behind the choice needs to be executed with conscious awareness if one is interested in more effectively making choices and altering one's reality in accordance with one's plans and goals. Defining the choice itself with the reasoning involved in making the choice is counter-productive to that.
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5548088 - 04/23/06 04:39 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
but that's understood. when someone says "i can't talk i have to write a paper" you know that they really could talk but they are choosing to write the paper because they prefer they outcome which will result from that course of action. these concepts of preference are embedded in our language and give rise to shoulds and should nots. furthermore, what is wrong with attatching a negative judgement when someone does something they shouldn't do? are you saying if someone raped your daughter you would not have any complaint against him, his action being morally nuetral?
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
|
"Quote:
fireworks_god said:
Quote:
Deviate said: calling the same thing by a different word doesn't change much.
It doesn't change much, but only to those who do not recognize the difference implied by different words. It isn't much change when one doesn't properly understand what is being changed. 
Preference, as a word, only represents the act of selecting something over other choices, or that which is selected. It does not provide any commentary on the nature of the choice or how the decision is made.
"Should" and "should not" are, essentially, commands. It is a dictation of suggestions within the context of obligations. Cause and effect, ultimately.
One can prefer in regards to one's current position in one's life situation and one's chosen path (which, in itself, is a preference) without utilizing a mechanism of dictation.
Utilizing only preferences implies consideration of one's thought processes involved in making the decision in a conscious, rational manner. Thinking through "shoulds" and "should nots" involves preconceived notions of what one's life situation is, first and foremost.
Maintaining a conscious presence in one's decision making means that one simply utilizes preferences, as a preference defines a choice simply as a choice. The reasoning behind the choice needs to be executed with conscious awareness if one is interested in more effectively making choices and altering one's reality in accordance with one's plans and goals. Defining the choice itself with the reasoning involved in making the choice is counter-productive to that.
 Peace.
"
but as i tried to explain, the concept of should stems from an agreed upon preference or goal. for example, if you want to win at tennis, you should practise your serve. this is the concept of should and it is very useful.
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548249 - 04/23/06 05:31 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not a moralist, so I doubt that my response to any situation would involve judging it as right or wrong.
I do believe that individuals have the ultimate authority over their own body, including whether someone else may be allowed to touch it, and that those who violate this authority are acting outside of their rights. If someone raped my son or daughter, I would act to see that they were caught and punished to the fullest extent of the law.
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5548267 - 04/23/06 05:36 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I'm not a moralist, so I doubt that my response to any situation would involve judging it as right or wrong.
I do believe that individuals have the ultimate authority over their own body, including whether someone else may be allowed to touch it, and that those who violate this authority are acting outside of their rights. If someone raped my son or daughter, I would act to see that they were caught and punished to the fullest extent of the law.
"acting outside of their rights" sounds like just a fancy way of saying wrong.
|
mr_kite
The Watcher


Registered: 09/16/02
Posts: 2,577
Loc: shambhala
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548271 - 04/23/06 05:37 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Now I'm almost certain I'm wrong.
-------------------- let yourself be silently drawn by the stronger pull of what you really love
|
RedNucleus
Causal Observer


Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 4,103
Loc: The Seahorse Valley
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5548342 - 04/23/06 05:55 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I am with Deviate on this one. I can say "You should rape her because she's good looking," but I'm not suggesting that it's moral behavior to rape her.
--------------------
Namaste
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548454 - 04/23/06 06:19 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Are you claiming that civil rights are moral rather than legal? Whether an action is moral or immoral is only loosely connected to whether it is legal or illegal.
Take drug use, for example. You would be hard pressed to make a case that an individual who chooses to alter his or her consciousness by taking a drug is immoral, but their act is illegal in the U.S.
I have the legal right to decide whether someone else will have sex with me. If they violate my rights, and also act outside of their right to have sex, which is limited by my right NOT to have sex with them, then they will be legally punished. The morality or immorality of their act is irrelevant.
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5548577 - 04/23/06 06:48 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Veritas said: Are you claiming that civil rights are moral rather than legal? Whether an action is moral or immoral is only loosely connected to whether it is legal or illegal.
Take drug use, for example. You would be hard pressed to make a case that an individual who chooses to alter his or her consciousness by taking a drug is immoral, but their act is illegal in the U.S.
I have the legal right to decide whether someone else will have sex with me. If they violate my rights, and also act outside of their right to have sex, which is limited by my right NOT to have sex with them, then they will be legally punished. The morality or immorality of their act is irrelevant.
no i wasn't saying that, sorry i was unclear. basically i had 2 dissagreements with you, one was over the word should. the second was over your example of moral relativism. i think with the rape example, i was trying to say that by prosecuting the rapist to the full extent of the law, you are essentially casting his action in a negative light. secondly, i thought you were the one who was saying civil rigthts were moral. you said "i believe people have the ultimate authority over their own body, including who touches it" not "legally people have ultimate authority over their own body".
as for moral relativism i think it should be noted that it does refute morality. this is because context plays a role in determining right and wrong.
Edited by Deviate (04/23/06 06:51 PM)
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548796 - 04/23/06 07:40 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Deviate said: basically i had 2 dissagreements with you, one was over the word should. the second was over your example of moral relativism.
When did I speak in favor of moral relativism? I am not in favor of moral judgments of any sort, but was describing the moral inconsistency which is commonly practiced.
Quote:
i think with the rape example, i was trying to say that by prosecuting the rapist to the full extent of the law, you are essentially casting his action in a negative light.
I suppose it would be possible to phrase "non-preferable" as "negative," the distinction I would make is that a moral judgment says that the rapist is bad/evil, while a legal judgment says that his actions are unacceptable & sets consequences for those actions.
Quote:
secondly, i thought you were the one who was saying civil rigthts were moral. you said "i believe people have the ultimate authority over their own body, including who touches it" not "legally people have ultimate authority over their own body".
My beliefs are in alignment with the law on this subject, but I would hold the same belief regardless of the legal support or lack thereof. For example, my belief in our sovereign authority over our body extends to our right to end our own lives, or to help someone end theirs when they request it.
Again, this does not have to do with my moral code, but my preferences as a human being.
Perhaps this distinction seems frivolous to you, as you have been content to make nothing of it, but it is meaningful to me. I do not choose to live according to the standard of good/evil, right/wrong, because I do not find these methods of evaluation descriptive or helpful. Just as I do not find religion descriptive or helpful.
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5548835 - 04/23/06 07:50 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
When did I speak in favor of moral relativism? I am not in favor of moral judgments of any sort, but was describing the moral inconsistency which is commonly practiced.
I meant the fact that morals aren't consistent doesn't prove they don't exist.
Quote:
I suppose it would be possible to phrase "non-preferable" as "negative," the distinction I would make is that a moral judgment says that the rapist is bad/evil, while a legal judgment says that his actions are unacceptable & sets consequences for those actions.
.
i dissagree. i don't think a moral judgement says anything different than a "non preferable" judegment. you could just easily label those who behave in "non preferable" ways as bad. the preferableness of the outcome is the bases of moral judgements.
Quote:
My beliefs are in alignment with the law on this subject, but I would hold the same belief regardless of the legal support or lack thereof. For example, my belief in our sovereign authority over our body extends to our right to end our own lives, or to help someone end theirs when they request it.
Again, this does not have to do with my moral code, but my preferences as a human being.
Perhaps this distinction seems frivolous to you, as you have been content to make nothing of it, but it is meaningful to me. I do not choose to live according to the standard of good/evil, right/wrong, because I do not find these methods of evaluation descriptive or helpful. Just as I do not find religion descriptive or helpful.
but it appears you do live according to these standards, you simply refuse to call them by their traditional names.
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548891 - 04/23/06 08:02 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Calling something "good" or "bad," "right" or "wrong," asserts ones opinion as universal. Calling it "preferable" or "non-preferable" claims the choice as purely subjective/personal, which all moral judgments are in fact.
Moralistic terms are not just traditional, they are religious. Moralism assumes that one's preferences, or those of your established group, are the correct and righteous choices. I reject this stance and the terms by which it is conveyed. This is what is preferable and healthy for me. Your choices may vary.
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5548946 - 04/23/06 08:16 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Calling something "good" or "bad," "right" or "wrong," asserts ones opinion as universal. Calling it "preferable" or "non-preferable" claims the choice as purely subjective/personal, which all moral judgments are in fact.
you could just as easily be wrong when claiming something was preferable. it might not work out the way you imagined and turn out to be the "wrong" or not preferable choice.
Moralistic terms are not just traditional, they are religious. Moralism assumes that one's preferences, or those of your established group, are the correct and righteous choices. I reject this stance and the terms by which it is conveyed. This is what is preferable and healthy for me. Your choices may vary. 
it assumes that certain things are preferable.
Edited by Deviate (04/23/06 08:17 PM)
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Deviate]
#5548969 - 04/23/06 08:21 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
It assumes that certain things are preferable for everyone. I assume that certain things are preferable to me. This is a safe assumption, as I actually do prefer some things over other things.
For instance, I prefer Rocky Road ice cream to Pistachio. This does not mean that Pistachio ice cream is wrong, evil, or bad. It has no actual moral qualities.
I prefer that you do not eat my Rocky Road ice cream when I have not offered it to you. If you eat my ice cream without my permission, you have not taken on moral qualities, either. You are neutral. However, I may seek legal assistance in getting compensated for my ice cream. This does not mean that I think you are evil and wrong, just that I want to go out and buy more ice cream.
|
PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....


Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 14 years, 11 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5549253 - 04/23/06 09:21 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Eating someone else's ice cream without permission IS definitely a crime.... 
>^;;^<
-------------------- I'll be your midnight French Fry.... "The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...." >^;;^<
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
|
|
Kinky hair, like heightened melanation are later adaptations of Homo Sapien Sapien around equatorial Africa for sun protection (e.g., from malignant melanoma). Early humans may have had had orangatan-like hair according to some. Black Australian people have straight hair and are also highly melanated. Caucasians living in weak sunlit latitudes may have developed those platinum locks to serve like fiber-optics to conduct more sunlight to the scalp for the additional sun-produced vitamin D. These adaptations are not correlated with human intelligence, Intelligent Design possibly, or just survival of the fittest.
|
RedNucleus
Causal Observer


Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 4,103
Loc: The Seahorse Valley
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Being Wrong [Re: Veritas]
#5549601 - 04/23/06 11:08 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You are talking about preference, and you gave that ice cream example. I don't know if you remember, but if we follow the posts, that ice cream example was supposed to be showing that you did not involve morals in the following sentence: "I do believe that individuals have the ultimate authority over their own body, including whether someone else may be allowed to touch it, and that those who violate this authority are acting outside of their rights"
The ice cream example is of individual preference. The rape example is definitely making a moral judgement You said people have a right not to have sex. It follows that depriving them of this right is amoral. If a rapist has a "personal preference" that people do not have such rights, would the rape be a-ok with you?
--------------------
Namaste
|
|